Voltaire's Child
Fool on the Hill
Well, maybe Olska's right, maybe she's not. Maybe she's half and half right/wrong.
But in any event, I don't think psychoanalyzing other contributors is ok.
The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But
- Thread starter lkwdblds
- Start date
- Status
Well, maybe Olska's right, maybe she's not. Maybe she's half and half right/wrong.
But in any event, I don't think psychoanalyzing other contributors is ok.
RogerB
Crusader
Anhh, Toady,
I try to get the truth expressed, for it is the truth that undoes the "funny" stuff.
Running around missing the truth only adds to the confusion.
And eventually, when enough hints have hit the ground after never being taken up, one really needs be direct.
I was expecting some to accuse me of being UNkind in my postbut the kindest thing one can do for friends is to point to the truth that they might benefit.
Though Lakey is named, I suspected, as you express, it might 'indicate" and relieve charge for others :wink2: One must realize there are many more on this thread than any one person
And speaking of others . . . where's the famous Face?
R
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
Well, got to give it at least it is hundreds of thousands of dollars cheaper than scientology.
Sometimes " distributors " is a more accurate word to use than " contributors "
lkwdblds
Crusader
This is a fantastic post. I missed reading it.
This is really a fascinating tech post in my opinion! I had missed it just concentrating on all the hullabaloo about the 2009 Freezone conventioin.
The concept that charge is life force is major to me, especially since I am still giving massages to encountering large amounts of charge on their heads. (BTW, I long ago gave up the releasing of entities in conjunction with massages.)
As I understand it, the skull acts as a capacitor and stores static electrical charge. When too much of this accumulates on a person's head, it tends to mess the person up with headaches, neck, back and shoulders out of alignment, etc.
If the masseur is standing on the floor, usually some of the charge on the head will run out through the masseur and into the floor. I always thought that this is good since the person seemed to immediately feel much better.
My Scn background had me thinking that the more charge released from the human body the metter.
Ted's post really impinge's into this belief which was motivating my massage style. Perhap's it would be better to keep the charge and bring it into a positive and useful state as Ted suggests.
The way I experience it, some is going to flow out when the masseur touches the person's head. Not much can be done to stop that (perhaps wear rubber shoes?) Perhaps some of the charge can be redirected, either through massaging other parts of the body such as the neck, shoulders, triceps, etc. or the masseur could talk to the client. Once a client starts talking about what is bothering him, he is to some degree "in session" and if the massuer just listens attentively and acknowledges, it is very likely some of the charge will be brought into a useful state which would be preferable to just discharhing it.
Lakey
Hubbard gave "charge" a bad connotation.
But, life cannot be lived without charge. Charge is life force--sometimes mismanaged, but life force nevertheless.
Charge as Scios know it is to be gotten rid of.
By examination, by review, a being is able to (re)evaluate its relationship to an experience or terminal, and bring the life force known as charge into a useful, desirable state.
It doesn't take much shift in perception to step out of the Hubbardian box. Such a step opens up a while new world of relationships and understandings.
This is really a fascinating tech post in my opinion! I had missed it just concentrating on all the hullabaloo about the 2009 Freezone conventioin.
The concept that charge is life force is major to me, especially since I am still giving massages to encountering large amounts of charge on their heads. (BTW, I long ago gave up the releasing of entities in conjunction with massages.)
As I understand it, the skull acts as a capacitor and stores static electrical charge. When too much of this accumulates on a person's head, it tends to mess the person up with headaches, neck, back and shoulders out of alignment, etc.
If the masseur is standing on the floor, usually some of the charge on the head will run out through the masseur and into the floor. I always thought that this is good since the person seemed to immediately feel much better.
My Scn background had me thinking that the more charge released from the human body the metter.
Ted's post really impinge's into this belief which was motivating my massage style. Perhap's it would be better to keep the charge and bring it into a positive and useful state as Ted suggests.
The way I experience it, some is going to flow out when the masseur touches the person's head. Not much can be done to stop that (perhaps wear rubber shoes?) Perhaps some of the charge can be redirected, either through massaging other parts of the body such as the neck, shoulders, triceps, etc. or the masseur could talk to the client. Once a client starts talking about what is bothering him, he is to some degree "in session" and if the massuer just listens attentively and acknowledges, it is very likely some of the charge will be brought into a useful state which would be preferable to just discharhing it.
Lakey
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
Anhh, Toady,
I try to get the truth expressed, for it is the truth that undoes the "funny" stuff.
Running around missing the truth only adds to the confusion.
And eventually, when enough hints have hit the ground after never being taken up, one really needs be direct.
I was expecting some to accuse me of being UNkind in my post
Though Lakey is named, I suspected, as you express, it might 'indicate" and relieve charge for others :wink2: One must realize there are many more on this thread than any one person
And speaking of others . . . where's the famous Face?
R
Face, I don't know. When I scan down the post line I'm looking at who posted and it is you and Face that brighten my day when I see either of you has made a new post.
And, God, I've tried to subtle with Lakey and gotten no results.
He keeps making shit up about I feel this way or that way so it makes his point and 'makes him right'.
I supported the Independents back when he was throwing money at the church and eating up his NOTs.
I think most people get that what I object to is this forum being used by some extremely few posters to try to keep people in the church staying in the church and making those recently out feel badly about getting out.
Most posters do manage to see through what is trying to be done with that.
And most posters know there are people who audit in the field that I feel are the beat available to do that IF that is what a pesron chooses to do.
Personally, I think scientology has inherent flaws inside the cult that outweigh most any perceived advantages to doing it there.
...
Oh, and Rog, I do need to send you a PM on an off baord topic...may I ?
RogerB
Crusader
Now that's a smart move
every 15 minutes a lap around the house . . . .I've just come back from a 45-60 minute stiff exercise walk with weights hot and sweaty, it just hit 76 degrees here (3lb can be put about each ankle, or carried on the wrists for extra stress and energy burning) . . .
However, the only risk I see in your plan is my passage by the kitchen . . . .
Toady, you're too tempting
R
lkwdblds
Crusader
Get serious Toady?
Common Toady, get serious. Even if the unasked for psychoanalysis is free, it is still bad news if it hurts the person it is directed at instead of helping them.
Maybe you are suggesting that it is better to get screwed up and still have some money in your pocket than to be screwed up and be broke. If that is what you mean then I am in agreement.
Lakey
Common Toady, get serious. Even if the unasked for psychoanalysis is free, it is still bad news if it hurts the person it is directed at instead of helping them.
Maybe you are suggesting that it is better to get screwed up and still have some money in your pocket than to be screwed up and be broke. If that is what you mean then I am in agreement.
Lakey
RogerB
Crusader
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
Lakey, OK here is a perfecr example of what make you such a pain in the ass to have involvement with whatsoever.
I have asked you to leave me out of your posts - you ignore that.
In a post NOT to you I say something is " CHEAPER " and you chime in with "maybe I am suggesting BETTER....and then go on to if that is what I mean"
No you dumb fuck. I said CHEAPER. I meant CHEAPER.
I understand you can not help yourself from compulsively changing things to what you want them to be so you can make yourself right.
WIll you ever shut the fuck up about my posts that have not a fucking thing to do with you and just let me have an exchange with another poster without you fucking butting in with your dubbed in made up bullshit
Can that fucking ever fucking happen?
Apparently fucking not.
it is a massive waste of time to straighten out the perverted shit you post.
Terril park
Sponsor
Take your points. Especially the one above.
Lets put this a different way. I'm not a techie but not ignorant of
the tech and am " expert" in green on white. At least read it all.
I find Ted's comments easy to follow and don't recall disagreeing with anything he's said for a decade.
I've not been able to Understand Alan iether. However when we met he cleared up a big misunderstanding of his efforts. Just didn't get it before.
Perhaps I'm totally to blame for this failure. Perhaps my ignorance of
non scn jargon is.
But then maybe you havn't explained yourself as well as you might.
Maybe I don't know enough to understand.
Not trying really to make you right or wrong. Just putting my viewpoint out there.
Hope it helps.
Hatshepsut
Crusader
.....
Terril park
Sponsor
Yes, folks do "interpret" and "opinionate" . . . .
Alan Walter created a wonderful process/exercise in this regard. It's called the "Truth & Opinions Exercise (or maybe Process)"
Basically, it's a wonderful "objectives" type process, and not only does it facilitate you arriving causatively in present time, but very awaredly so.
You see, most ordinary folks don't truly, actually observe and perceive what they are interfacing with or relating to. What they are constantly doing, in present time, is superimposing opinions and altering "think-type-stuff" on their environment, the people and the communications they are involved with.
No surprise we see it here on ESMB, no?
The process is simply these commands. Client and processor are abulatory.
Processor: "Notice that (indicate and named thing/object/person, etc.)"
Client does so and indicates having done so.
Processor: "Tell me a fact about that (item)." Ack answer.
Processor: "Tell me an opinion about that (item)."
Ack answer . . . . .
Continue process till the usual wow! big wins, realizations from the client.
What is going on with this process is that the client is being given the opportunity to exercise his/her ability to perceive and to observe any automaticities he/she may have that constantly alters the ability to simply, actually perceive accurately what is there.
Folks are often absolutely amazed at what is discovered (both client and (new) processors) doing this process.
It's usually a big surprise to folks to discover that they are chronically superimposing altering "think" on their environment and relationships and thus not really operating with accuracy as a result
'Nuff said on that
Rog
This one I get.
RogerB
Crusader
So what are you trying to convey, communicate or ask here T?
It comes across on my end as a series of disrelated statements.
That first sentence is a mystery to me . . . what are you trying to say, ask, express, convey or whatever?
The last two paragraphs make sense, and are appreciated . . . but what's the viewpoint you allude to putting out? I don't see it in your post :confused2:
R
lkwdblds
Crusader
Lakey,
You're a master at invention and dub-in . . . . .
Please leave me out of your efforts to be right . . . .
You have no idea whatsoever as to what the "negotiations" were between the folks who invited me and myself. And you have no idea as to what any "agreements" were as regards what or how I could present.
Just knock off the dub-in and interpretations . . . . .
Don't you get it? You wear your friends out when you keep chirping away about them . . . and your interpretations of what they say and do.
Take a look at the point that the folks you do this to/with are actually discussing a SUBJECT . . . you too often don't, but instead start chirping away on and about your interpretations of what you think they've said/done. I't YOUR think, your thing, you keep going on about, superimposed on the simple actuality.
Sometimes there is limited info in a post or area addressed, but that's the actuality . . . no sense in dubbing in something to fit your want or think.
Take a look at the subjects we address and contribute to that.
If I were to attempt to answer or respond to all the stuff you dub-in, I'd have no time for anything else.
Take a look at how Face and Toady responded to getting worn down and out by your constant interpretive skills . . . . .
Rog
Rog, my goal is to get to the truth of this thing. My reputation and credibility are on the line. I did leave you out! I decided that I had no business writing about you or putting words in your mouth so I wrote in the general case. What you quoted of mine does not mention your name. I refer to a well known speaker speaking before an Association with all my comments applying to a fictitious and general case.
I admit that your participation in speaking at the FZ Convention is the model or impetus behind what I wrote but neverthelss, I specifically wrote my comments for a generalized situation. This is so true that as more was revealed to me, I had to make a retraction. At the 2009 FZ convention, I found out that your videos were edited by their owner before they were presented to the public. Once I found that out, my comments above did not apply because Aida Thomas, AKA Diana Class 8, who headed the event did not have the right to edit the tapes. Once I found this out about 2:00 AM this morning, I was done.
I made a lot of speculations, many of which were incorrect, but doing so, I finally got all the pieces put together. I purposely did not talk about you or mention your name and dealt in only a 3rd person general case. I eventually got to a point where I now have a full conceptual understanding of all that happened. My general example failed to hold up in the 2009 FZ situation. I retracted it and trying to move on.
This whole area was explored only because I made the statement that you were a bit more moderate than Toady and his associates when it comes to the area of Scientology tech and LRH. You strongly repudiated this statement and yet I know it is true for me because I have had numerous dialogues over long periods with both of you and I perceive a significant difference. You definitely treat me, and others who still feel that Hubbard and his tech have some good points, better than Toady and his associates treat us. That is my reality. I realize that you may not agree.
Are you suggesting to me that I don't have the right to have my own personal reality in something involving you, if you and I do not agree? Are you also suggesting that I can not discuss a fictitious situation between a speaker and an Association in the 3rd person where your name is not brought up?
What about my free speech rights? I have done nothing but complimented you and the FZ Convention and Aida Thomas aka Diana Class 8. You all acted in an exemplary manner and all created great products and helped a lot of people. I have said all along that none of you did anything the least bit incorrect or offensive.
I am just fighting for my right to believe that you are a little more moderate than Toady and company when it comes to LRH and his tech. You both have a tremendous amount that you don't like about LRH and his tech as do I. I just think you are a little more moderate in that regard than Toady & company.
Because I believe that and you feel otherwise, I have been attacked unmercifully from all sides. Isn't there room on ESMB for someone to believe a little differently than many other people on one relatively minor topic? I don't challenge your belief that you and Toady are both in the same exact category on the Hubbard issue. I respect that you believe what you do. I believe very close to what you believe but I feel you're a bit more moderate. What is the big deal? Why can't I have a slightly different belief than you on this one point?
Can you please grant me the right to believe nearly the same as you do instead of totally the same on this one small point? I really do not get it?
This exact issue is what prompted all the fighting on the Sharone thread. In my opinion, based on 5 weeks of exchanges over there, Toady & company insist on complete agreement. If they don't get it, they perceive one as a bad guy and try and dead agent him.
Lakey
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
:: Methinks need to change their nic to ...
" Peacock " ::
As a small child I remember my beloved Grandfather remarking about someone and with a nod towards that person saying rather sadly
" That fella would rather lie when the truth would suit him better ".
And, it was long after my Grandfather had passed on and I had become a grown person myself before that I finally got what he meant when he said that - and just how sad it made it feel.
Perhaps some things don't cure, they just have to be endured.
Damn.
" Peacock " ::
As a small child I remember my beloved Grandfather remarking about someone and with a nod towards that person saying rather sadly
" That fella would rather lie when the truth would suit him better ".
And, it was long after my Grandfather had passed on and I had become a grown person myself before that I finally got what he meant when he said that - and just how sad it made it feel.
Perhaps some things don't cure, they just have to be endured.
Damn.
Last edited:
lkwdblds
Crusader
I had you on ignore for a month and you complained, saying that I was not using my vaunted TR's. As a result, I cancel your ignore.
Then you comment on something to do with me as regards Olka's analysis of me and I make a light hearted comment to you in a joking way and you are extremely critical and offended. Go figure! There are things I could tell you to do but why exacerbate an out of control situation. Now that I now that you are serious about not wanting any "direct contact" from me, I might use this to my advantage.
On Sharone's thread, within a minute of every post I wrote, you replied with a scathing analysis, taking each sentence which I wrote and using it to trash me. Now that I know what get's your goat, I can immediately post every time you post with a "direct contact" type of post. I am not going to do that because it is a waste of time. My goal would be to have you put me on ignore.
Lakey
RogerB
Crusader
Hey, Hats . . .
Are you saying naughty things that keep having to be retracted or redacted?
What's with these ellipses you seem to specialize in?
R
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
Lakey : Talk to the hand.
For anyone insterested, look at the time stamp between a post made and when this guy replies to it.
Typical is half an hour or so.
If you ever happen to check " whose online " you'll notice some posters names and what they are doing.
Some posters appear over a halk an hour replying to a particular thread. Then their few line reply shows up.
Somebody please show you-know-who how to be invisible
Last edited:
lkwdblds
Crusader
Auditor's Toad
Clear as Mud
Hey, Hats . . .
Are you saying naughty things that keep having to be retracted or redacted?
What's with these ellipses you seem to specialize in?
R
Dang, I just thought somebody was saying they had lots of periods.
- Status